Why reopening investigation reports can undermine fairness despite good intentions
HR leaders want investigations to feel fair. That usually means transparency, listening carefully, and ensuring everyone feels heard. But a recent Federal Court decision reminds us that fairness has limits and crossing them can quietly create legal risk.
In Carreau v. Canada (Attorney General), 2025 FC 1537, the Court sent a clear message: once an external investigator has completed their work, the report is not a collaborative draft.
What Happened and Why It Matters to HR
An employer retained an external investigator to examine workplace harassment allegations. The investigator completed the process, delivered a final report, and concluded that harassment had occurred.
After sharing the report, the employer became concerned about procedural fairness and attempted to reframe the report as preliminary, inviting the responding party to comment before finalization.
The investigator refused, explaining that the parties had already been given full opportunity to respond during the evidence-gathering stage. Allowing comments after conclusions were reached would compromise the independence of the process.
The Federal Court agreed.
The Court’s Key Message in Plain Terms
The Court was clear:
• The right to respond applies to evidence, not conclusions.
• Once fact-gathering is complete, investigators must be insulated from pressure.
• Allowing late-stage input undermines unbiased investigations.
In short, fairness happens during the process, not after the decision is made.
Why This Is a Wake-Up Call for Employers
The employer in this case was attempting to act carefully. However, the Court emphasized that good intentions do not justify blurring roles.
Reopening reports, inviting post-decision commentary, or second-guessing an investigator’s independence can:
• Undermine neutrality
• Increase legal exposure
• Weaken trust in the investigation process
The risk is heightened when external investigators are paid by the employer or when senior leaders are involved.
What Proactive HR Teams Should Do Instead
Build fairness into the process from the beginning and protect it through completion.
• Ensure full disclosure of allegations and evidence during fact-gathering
• Clearly define when and how parties can respond
• Train leaders on their boundaries once an external investigator is engaged
• Treat final reports as final
The Bottom Line
A fair investigation is not one that keeps reopening. It is one that is well designed, clearly communicated, and properly contained.
Once the evidence is gathered and parties are heard, investigators need space to analyze, decide, and conclude without influence.
Proactive HR Starts Before the Complaint Lands
At HR Proactive, we help organizations strengthen workplace investigations before risk escalates by:
• Designing investigation-ready policies that support fairness, clarity, and defensibility
• Training all employees on Respect in Action to reinforce expectations for conduct and accountability
• Reducing risk before fairness becomes a legal issue by ensuring quality workplace investigations led by a trusted consultancy that has been building respectful workplaces for almost 30 years
